Search

There is an urgent need for consensus on what defines a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) self-management intervention. We aimed to obtain consensus regarding the conceptual definition of a COPD self-management intervention by engaging an international panel of COPD self-management experts using Delphi technique features and an additional group meeting.In each consensus round the experts were asked to provide feedback on the proposed definition and to score their level of agreement (1=totally disagree; 5=totally agree). The information provided was used to modify the definition for the next consensus round. Thematic analysis was used for free text responses and descriptive statistics were used for agreement scores.In total, 28 experts participated. The consensus round response rate varied randomly over the five rounds (ranging from 48% (n=13) to 85% (n=23)), and mean definition agreement scores increased from 3.8 (round 1) to 4.8 (round 5) with an increasing percentage of experts allocating the highest score of 5 (round 1: 14% (n=3); round 5: 83% (n=19)).In this study we reached consensus regarding a conceptual definition of what should be a COPD self-management intervention, clarifying the requisites for such an intervention. Operationalisation of this conceptual definition in the near future will be an essential next step., (The content of this work is not subject to copyright. Design and branding are copyright ©ERS 2016.)

Current tools for recording chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations are limited and often lack validity testing. We assessed the validity of an automated telephonic exacerbation assessment system (TEXAS) and compared its outcomes with existing tools. Over 12 months, 86 COPD patients (22.1% females; mean age 66.5 yrs; mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s 53.4% predicted) were called once every 2 weeks by TEXAS to record changes in respiratory symptoms, unscheduled healthcare utilisation and use of respiratory medication. The responses to TEXAS were validated against exacerbation-related information collected by observations made by trained research assistants during home visits. No care assistance was provided in any way. Diagnostic test characteristics were estimated using commonly used definitions of exacerbation. Detection rates, compliance and patient preference were assessed, and compared with paper diary cards and medical record review. A total of 1,824 successful calls were recorded, of which 292 were verified by home visits (median four calls per patient, interquartile range three to five calls per patient). Independent of the exacerbation definition used, validity was high, with sensitivities and specificities between 66% and 98%. Detection rates and compliance differed extensively between the different tools, but were highest with TEXAS. Patient preference did not differ. TEXAS is a valid tool to assess COPD exacerbation rates in prospective clinical studies. Using different tools to record exacerbations strongly affects exacerbation occurrence rates.